A few fun facts about citizenship in the good old USA--and when I say "citizenship" I don't mean just voting rights. Obviously voting rights are an important feature of citizenship today, but in the 19th C the two were not synonymous.
In the early days of the republic, only those who owned property could vote--and surprisingly, this included some white women (and mostly in New England). However, by 1810-ish, all these female property owners lost their voting rights. Interestingly enough, they still had to pay taxes. So this left women as second-class citizens. They could belong to the nation, but not contribute their voices into how it was run. This left just the white, wealthy male property-owners running things. However, by 1840, all white men over the age of 21 had the vote in almost every state and territory.
Of course, no people of color of either gender had any voting rights in antebellum America; even free African Americans were excluded, thanks to supreme court cases like Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857). However, access to citizenship expanded for white women before the Civil War. If foreign born (and white) they could obtain derivative citizenship their husbands who were birthright or naturalized citizens. And it was quite easy for white men to obtain citizenship. They just had to establish residency and swear an oath of allegiance.
That all changed after the Civil War, especially in the late 19th and early 20th century. Xenophobia was at its peak with immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe. The older settlers thought the nation was going to change color and religion. Quotas were put in place to restrict the flow of immigrants. This cartoon from Puck clearly demonstrates the xenophobia of the time.
White, native-born women, who married foreigners, LOST their citizenship! Apparently, such women could not be loyal to their home nation before their husbands, so they purportedly became subjects to their husbands' ruler or monarch.
Not all women, however, were accepted as subjects in their husbands' homeland and many women became stateless beings. Horrible, I know! It wasn't until the 1922 Cable Act or "Married Women's Independent Nationality Act" that some of the law was repealed; and the after effects for those women and their children were felt well into the 1990s.
For me this is all very interesting as a feminist, but also because I did marry (and divorce) a foreigner, a subject of the Kingdom of Tonga. Fortunately for me I did NOT lose my citizenship when we married and I still have it now that we are divorced. Luckily for him, he was able to legitimize his residence in the USA when we married and filed the necessary paperwork. (And by the way, all the fees were paid by me out of my 401K that I cashed out! GRRR, still makes me angry that I was so gullible and willing to do that for him.) And unfortunately, even though we are now divorced, I am still responsible for him financially via the Affidavit of Support, I-864. Only way to remove that is by him repatriating to Tonga or by his death.
HOWEVER, I did find out something that made this deplorable situation a little easier to bear. The X can NEVER, EVER become a citizen through my sponsorship--even though he is now a legal resident. Not even if he marries another US citizen! (Thank you Lady Liberty!)
Here is how USCIS policy in legal jargon:
A person’s marital status may be terminated by a judicial divorce or by an annulment. A divorce or annulment breaks the marital relationship. The applicant is no longer the spouse of a U.S. citizen if the marriage is terminated by a divorce or annulment. Accordingly, such an applicant is ineligibleto naturalize as the spouse of a U.S. citizen if the divorce or annulment occurs before or after the naturalization application is filed.
...
When a marriage is terminated by divorce, the termination is entered by the court with jurisdiction and is documented by a copy of the final divorce decree. USCIS determines the validity of a divorce by examining whether the state or country which granted the divorce properly assumed jurisdiction over the divorce proceeding. USCIS also determines whether the parties followed the proper legal formalities required by the state or country in which the divorce was obtained to determine if the divorce is legally binding. In all cases, the divorce must be final.
An applicant’s ineligibility for naturalization as the spouse of a U.S. citizen due to the death of the citizen spouse or to divorce is not cured by the subsequent marriage to another U.S. citizen.
But then again, he still not qualify since only those of "good moral character" may naturalize as citizens. He also must:
Be a person ... attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, and favorably disposed toward the good order and happiness of the United States.
Lesson learned: I am lucky that today my citizenship is intact and not stripped away because of my former marriage. And doubly lucky that I am legally allowed to resume my birth name and individual identity without that man dragging me down anymore. TOWANDA!
PS I know that I did not even touch on the crazy racist Chinese Exclusion Acts or the conditions of Native Americans in the 19th C--but I promise to in the future!
